趋近化视阈下中美贸易争端的话语研究
|
摘要
基于趋近化理论,从空间、时间和价值观三个维度探讨中美贸易争端中双方政府的官方话语特征,双方在态度、立场上的异同和构建的国家形象,并构建趋近化模型。研究发现:中美双方均采用三种趋近化策略以体现贸易争端带来的巨大危害、长久的影响和破坏性的后果。不同之处在于美方话语视中方多年来"不平等的贸易措施"为不断迫近的威胁;而中方话语客观描述美方的不合理措施及造成的严重后果,坚决反对此类违背国家和世界人民利益的行为,倡导互利共赢。从趋近化视角研究中美贸易争端中的官方话语,有利于挖掘其隐藏的话语策略和目的,为更加深刻理解中美贸易关系及我国在贸易争端中应采取的最佳话语策略提供新的研究视角和启示。
Based on the theory of proximization,this paper probes into the official discourse characteristics of the two governments in the trade dispute between China and the United States from the three dimensions of space,time and values,the similarities and differences in the attitudes and positions of the two sides,and the constructed national image,and constructs a model of proximization. It is found that both China and the United States adopt three kinds of proximization strategies to reflect the great harm,long-term influence and destructive consequences of trade disputes. The difference is that the American discourse regards China's"unfair trade measures"for years as a constant threat; However,Chinese discourse objectively describes the unreasonable measures and serious consequences caused by the United States,firmly opposes such acts that violate the interests of the country and the world people,and advocates mutual benefit and a win-win situation. The study of official discourse in Sino-US trade dispute from the perspective of proximization is helpful to excavate its hidden discourse strategy and purpose,and to provide a new research perspective and enlightenment for a deeper understanding of Sino-US trade relations and the best discourse strategy that China should adopt in trade disputes.
Based on the theory of proximization,this paper probes into the official discourse characteristics of the two governments in the trade dispute between China and the United States from the three dimensions of space,time and values,the similarities and differences in the attitudes and positions of the two sides,and the constructed national image,and constructs a model of proximization. It is found that both China and the United States adopt three kinds of proximization strategies to reflect the great harm,long-term influence and destructive consequences of trade disputes. The difference is that the American discourse regards China's"unfair trade measures"for years as a constant threat; However,Chinese discourse objectively describes the unreasonable measures and serious consequences caused by the United States,firmly opposes such acts that violate the interests of the country and the world people,and advocates mutual benefit and a win-win situation. The study of official discourse in Sino-US trade dispute from the perspective of proximization is helpful to excavate its hidden discourse strategy and purpose,and to provide a new research perspective and enlightenment for a deeper understanding of Sino-US trade relations and the best discourse strategy that China should adopt in trade disputes.
引文
[1]苗迎春.中美经贸摩擦研究[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2009:3-11.
[2]俞萍萍,赵永亮.中美贸易战本质、影响及对策分析[J].现代管理科学,2018(11):87-89.
[3]黄礼健.中美贸易战升级的原因、影响及趋势分析[J].新金融,2018(9):20-24.
[4]郭可为.中美贸易战:动机分析与情景推演[J].国际经济合作,2018(5):18-24.
[5] Cap P. Proximization:The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing[M]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2013.
[6] Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse:Theory and Practice[M]. London:Routledge,2004.
[7] Cap P. Legitimization in Political Discourse:A Cross-disciplinary Perspective on the Modern US War Rhetoric[M]. Newcastle:Cambridge Scholar Press,2006.
[8] Cap P. Towards the proximization model of the analysis of legitimization in political discourse[J]. Journal of Pragmatics,2008(40):17-41.
[9] Cap P. Applying cognitive pragmatics to Critical Discourse Studies:A proximization analysis of three public space discourses[J]. Journal of Pragmatics,2014(70):16-30.
[10] Hart C. Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science:New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse[M]. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2010.
[11] Hart C. Discourse,Grammar and Ideology:Functional and Cognitive Perspectives[M]. London:Bloomsbury,2014.
[12]潘冬.批评话语分析的新方法:趋近化分析[J].山东外语教学,2017,38(4):9-16.
[13]武建国,林金容,栗艺.批评性话语分析的新方法:趋近化理论[J].外国语(上海外国语大学学报),2016,39(5):75-82.
[14]张天伟.政治领导人演讲的话语体系构建研究:基于近体化理论的案例分析[J].中国外语,2016,13(5):28-35.
[15]武建国,牛振俊.趋近化理论视域下的政治话语合法化分析:以特朗普的移民政策为例[J].中国外语,2018,15(6):48-53.
[16]颜冰,张辉.基于中美贸易战话语的批评认知语言学研究:趋近化理论的视角[J].外语研究,2018,35(6):16-22.
[17]刘文宇,徐博书.从“伙伴”到“对手”:《美国国家安全战略报告》的话语空间分析[J].外语研究,2018,35(6):8-15.
[2]俞萍萍,赵永亮.中美贸易战本质、影响及对策分析[J].现代管理科学,2018(11):87-89.
[3]黄礼健.中美贸易战升级的原因、影响及趋势分析[J].新金融,2018(9):20-24.
[4]郭可为.中美贸易战:动机分析与情景推演[J].国际经济合作,2018(5):18-24.
[5] Cap P. Proximization:The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing[M]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2013.
[6] Chilton P. Analysing Political Discourse:Theory and Practice[M]. London:Routledge,2004.
[7] Cap P. Legitimization in Political Discourse:A Cross-disciplinary Perspective on the Modern US War Rhetoric[M]. Newcastle:Cambridge Scholar Press,2006.
[8] Cap P. Towards the proximization model of the analysis of legitimization in political discourse[J]. Journal of Pragmatics,2008(40):17-41.
[9] Cap P. Applying cognitive pragmatics to Critical Discourse Studies:A proximization analysis of three public space discourses[J]. Journal of Pragmatics,2014(70):16-30.
[10] Hart C. Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science:New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse[M]. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2010.
[11] Hart C. Discourse,Grammar and Ideology:Functional and Cognitive Perspectives[M]. London:Bloomsbury,2014.
[12]潘冬.批评话语分析的新方法:趋近化分析[J].山东外语教学,2017,38(4):9-16.
[13]武建国,林金容,栗艺.批评性话语分析的新方法:趋近化理论[J].外国语(上海外国语大学学报),2016,39(5):75-82.
[14]张天伟.政治领导人演讲的话语体系构建研究:基于近体化理论的案例分析[J].中国外语,2016,13(5):28-35.
[15]武建国,牛振俊.趋近化理论视域下的政治话语合法化分析:以特朗普的移民政策为例[J].中国外语,2018,15(6):48-53.
[16]颜冰,张辉.基于中美贸易战话语的批评认知语言学研究:趋近化理论的视角[J].外语研究,2018,35(6):16-22.
[17]刘文宇,徐博书.从“伙伴”到“对手”:《美国国家安全战略报告》的话语空间分析[J].外语研究,2018,35(6):8-15.